It’s time Zimbabweans had the power to recall MPs and the President

One of the most troubling loopholes within Zimbabwe’s Constitution is the disempowerment of the very people who elect their leaders.

This contradiction is deeply embedded in our system: citizens can directly elect Members of Parliament (MPs), ward councillors, and even the president, yet have no legal avenue to directly recall them when they fail in their duties.

The power of recall rests not with the electorate, but with political parties or internal institutional processes, which are often manipulated for factional or personal gain.

It is an affront to the very foundations of democracy and accountability, and it is a loophole that must be urgently addressed.

• If you believe in my fight for justice in Zimbabwe, please consider supporting this work financially. Every contribution helps me keep going, independently and fearlessly.

In any credible institution or organisation, the principle is simple and universal: he who appoints must also have the power to dismiss.

This is rightly recognised within our own Constitution.

The President, for instance, has the authority under Section 104(1) of the Constitution to appoint ministers and, under Section 108(1)(a), to dismiss them.

This is a clear acknowledgement of the principle that authority to select should also come with the power to remove.

So why, then, are Zimbabwean citizens – who are the ones who elect the president, MPs, and councillors – denied this same authority?

Why must the electorate wait for a full five-year electoral cycle, regardless of how non-performing, corrupt, unresponsive or even outright abusive their elected officials become?

Zimbabwean MPs and ward councillors have, by and large, failed to live up to the constitutional responsibility of representing the people’s interests and safeguarding the public good.

Parliament, which should serve as the country’s foremost watchdog over the Executive, has instead become largely complicit through its deafening silence and inaction.

Despite repeated reports exposing massive financial mismanagement, irregular tender awards, and unexplained disbursements of public funds—some amounting to hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars—legislators have largely failed to initiate meaningful inquiries or hold public officials accountable.

They have not pressed for explanations from Treasury or demanded transparency in how resources are allocated and spent.

It is particularly damning that most parliamentary portfolio committees, which are mandated to oversee government ministries and state-owned enterprises, often function as ceremonial structures with no tangible impact on curbing corruption or improving service delivery.

Even as hospitals operate without basic drugs and schools lack textbooks, furniture, or adequate sanitation, our elected representatives have remained conspicuously silent.

At the local level, the performance of councillors has been equally dismal.

Across Zimbabwe’s towns and cities, residents endure persistent water shortages, uncollected refuse, potholed roads, collapsing sewer systems, and crumbling health and education infrastructure—all under the watch of elected local authorities.

Yet, there has been minimal effort from ward councillors to confront these challenges head-on or to demand accountability from urban management bodies.

This glaring failure to advocate for the people they represent strengthens the case for constitutional reform that gives citizens the power to recall those who neglect their duties.

The current system of impeachment and party-based recalls is not only insufficient, but often anti-democratic in practice.

The Constitution does provide for mechanisms to impeach the president under Section 97, which outlines grounds such as serious misconduct, failure to uphold the Constitution, and inability to perform presidential functions.

However, this process is entirely in the hands of Parliament – specifically, the political party with the majority.

As a result, it is not a safeguard for the electorate but rather a tool of internal party power dynamics.

The forced resignation of President Robert Mugabe in 2017, following the threat of impeachment, serves as a textbook example.

His removal had little to do with the will of the people – who had long expressed frustration with his rule – and everything to do with internal ZANU-PF succession battles.

Similarly, the recall of MPs is governed by Section 129(1)(k) of the Constitution, which allows a political party to notify the Speaker of Parliament that an MP has ceased to belong to that party – triggering an automatic dismissal from Parliament.

This provision has proven ripe for abuse.

It is not the voters who determine the fate of a non-performing or unethical MP, but the leadership of their political party.

What has emerged is a system in which MPs are more loyal to their party bosses than to the people who voted for them.

It is no surprise, then, that no MP has ever been recalled for failing to fulfil their campaign promises or neglecting their duties in Parliament.

Recent events only underscore this democratic deficiency.

From late 2023, Zimbabwe witnessed a wave of opposition MP recalls by Sengezo Tshabangu, the self-declared “interim secretary general” of the Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC).

Backed by the Speaker of Parliament and the courts, his recalls were less about principle and more about consolidating power – despite the clear absence of a democratic mandate from the CCC’s structures or the electorate.

Meanwhile, ZANU-PF also joined in recalling its own MPs and councillors who openly opposed President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s suspected attempt to extend his tenure beyond the constitutionally permitted two five-year terms.

A notable example is Gutu East MP Benjamin Ganyiwa, who was expelled and subsequently recalled from Parliament for allegedly promoting factionalism and organizing unauthorized meetings critical of the president.

These dismissals had nothing to do with the public interest or the representatives’ performance; rather, they were clear political purges aimed at silencing dissent within the party ranks.

Equally disturbing is the weaponisation of the impeachment provision.

Any attempt to frame such actions as serving the will of the people is disingenuous.

Take, for example, recent calls by expelled ZANU-PF Central Committee member and war veteran Blessed Geza for Parliament to impeach Mnangagwa, citing failure to lead.

While such claims may resonate with the public’s frustrations, they are more accurately read as part of the internal succession battles within the ruling party.

The people’s voices, as always, remain unheard in the formal processes.

This crisis of representation and accountability calls for a bold and transformative amendment to the Constitution.

Zimbabweans must be granted the constitutional right to recall elected officials – including MPs, councillors, and even the president – through a citizen-initiated process.

This could involve a petition system in which a prescribed percentage of registered voters in a constituency, ward, or nationally could sign a recall petition.

Once the threshold is reached, a by-election or recall referendum should be triggered, allowing citizens to decide the fate of their elected representative.

This is not a radical idea.

Rather, it is the logical extension of the right to vote.

If we have the power to hire, we must have the power to fire.

This system exists elsewhere.

In the United States, many states empower voters with the ability to recall elected officials through a formal petition process followed by a vote.

This mechanism provides a direct means for citizens to hold their representatives accountable between regular elections.

One of the most famous examples is California’s 2003 gubernatorial recall, where Governor Gray Davis was removed from office and replaced by Arnold Schwarzenegger, illustrating the power of direct democracy in action.

Beyond the US, other countries have embraced similar recall systems.

In Taiwan, for example, citizens can initiate recall petitions against legislators, which, if successful, lead to a recall vote.

This process has been used to enforce accountability and maintain public trust in elected officials.

Venezuela also allows recall referendums for elected officials, providing a constitutional tool for voters to remove representatives who fail to meet their responsibilities.

These international examples underscore the importance of giving citizens real power to remove underperforming or unpopular leaders, strengthening democratic governance.

These mechanisms are not always perfect, but they reinforce a crucial democratic principle: power resides with the people, not parties.

In Zimbabwe, however, constitutional amendments have gone in the opposite direction.

Rather than strengthening the hand of the electorate, changes have consolidated power in the executive.

The first attempt to amend the 2013 Constitution came in 2017 through Amendment No. 1, which sought to give the President unilateral power to appoint the Chief Justice, Deputy Chief Justice, and Judge President of the High Court—replacing the original requirement for public interviews and Judicial Service Commission recommendations.

However, this amendment was later struck down by the Constitutional Court in 2020 due to procedural irregularities in its passage through Parliament.

A more far-reaching and successfully enacted change came through Amendment No. 2, passed in 2021.

This amendment significantly expanded presidential powers by removing the presidential running mate clause—thereby allowing the President to handpick vice-presidents without public endorsement—and permitting judges to remain in office beyond the retirement age of 70, subject to the President’s approval.

These changes marked a clear shift away from democratic safeguards and toward greater executive control.

These changes undermined the gains of the 2013 Constitution, stripping away mechanisms designed to safeguard transparency and accountability.

It is therefore imperative that constitutional reform efforts move beyond entrenching executive control and instead focus on empowering citizens.

Democracy is more than voting every five years.

It is the ability to hold leaders accountable in real-time.

Without the power of recall, elections become a hollow ritual.

The people of Zimbabwe deserve better.

They deserve to have the authority not only to elect their leaders but to remove them when those leaders betray the public trust.

Until that right is enshrined in our Constitution, Zimbabwean democracy will remain incomplete – a system where the people can choose their leaders, but cannot stop them from choosing themselves over the nation.

• Tendai Ruben Mbofana is a social justice advocate and writer. Please feel free to WhatsApp or Call: +263715667700 | +263782283975, or email: mbofana.tendairuben73@gmail.com, or visit website: https://mbofanatendairuben.news.blog/